Talk:Rolf Hochhuth

Older

Does anyone know whether Hochhuth was a citizen of free Germany or communist Germany during the time he published his earlier plays? Knowing this may help one to understand the controversies relating to them.

The play Soldiers was not actually banned in the UK, as theatre censorship had ended before the play was available for production. The production of the play at the NT was cancelled, though, due to political controversy. It was soon produced in a commercial, West End production. I have clarified this in the article. Those interested should see the documentation appendiced in Laurence Olivier's autobiogrpahy, Confessions of an Actor.Jmc29

Hochhuth was, and is, a citizen of the Federal Republic of Germany. --84.58.216.182 00:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Awful article

"Hochhuth is best known for his 1963 drama Der Stellvertreter. Ein christliches Trauerspiel (The Deputy, a Christian Tragedy), a controversial theater work because of its criticism of Pope Pius XII's role in World War II. Though of little historical value and credibility, it is acknowledged as a work of considerable literary merit by some, while publisher Ed Keating and journalist Warren Hinckle, who organized a committee to defend the play as a matter of free speech, considered it "dramaturgically flawed." (If You Have a Lemon, Make Lemonade, 1974.) [1].

---> Why so negative?

---> "Though of little historical value and credibility" -- in fact Hochhuth's success changed the public perception of Piux XII, not to mention what we know today.

---> The text is a drama, not a "play"

---> There are other important layers: byzantinism vs. heroism, and of course the irony of modern religion: God's deputy is unable and unwilling to stop nazi crimes.

It was first produced in the United Kingdom by the Royal Shakespeare Company in London in 1963, and revived by the Citizens Theatre, Glasgow in 1986. It will receive only its third British production at the Finborough Theatre, London, in August 2006.

---> UK centric

The play was seen by commentators as an attempt of Hochhuth to transfer the guilt of his own parents to other, more notable, persons, thus trying to acquit his own people and relatives from consent to Nazi crimes.

---> A very superficial ad hominem reading.

---> What special guilt of his parents?

Hannah Arendt about "The Deputy"

Hannah Arendt has written a very interesting essay entitled "The Deputy: Guilt by Silence?"

Eric Bentley, Editor, Storm Over 'The Deputy' (New York: Grove Press, 1964),

Pages 85-94. I am going to quote her, her judgement about the quality of the drama.

Austerlitz -- 88.72.28.91 18:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

References to Pacepa and Irving

The reference to the anti-Hochhuth article of Ion Mihai Pacepa on “The Deputy” („National Review“, Jan. 25, 2007) in the References and External links section should be reconsidered. A deletion of this sparsely reliable source would be resonable. German conservative historian Thomas Brechenmacher strongly challenges the plausibility of Pacepa in the foremost German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ("Hochhuths Quellen. War der 'Stellvertreter' vom KGB inspiriert?", in: F.A.Z., April 26, 2007) with reference to numerous „inconsistencies“ (the files on Pius XII. were still treasured in the Vatican’s state secretariat in 1960, Casaroli still played a subaltern role at that time and could hardly have given Romanian spymasters insight into these documents, Hochhuth’s documentary appendix “Historical Sidelights” goes back on sources „that were available in print at that time”, etc.). --Diggindeeper 13:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

It is highly remarkable that exactly at the time that the sanctification procedure for Pius XII initiated in 1965 has been resumed and the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints presents an outline for a decree to classify Pius XII as "adorable" to Benedict XVI in 2007, activities to defame Pius critic Rolf Hochhuth are highly en vogue again, such as Ion Mihai Pacepas strongly suggestive but less strongly investigated article in the National Review or their faint reverberations such as the addition of a polemical photograph of Hochhuth and David Irving in the article on Hochhuth... Do sacred ends actually justify every means in Wikipedia? --Diggindeeper 21:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The text in the article saying "Hochhuth called Irving a truly great and very serious historian" has the reference http://www.jf-archiv.de/archiv05/200508021809.htm "Die Würde des Ortes respektieren". However, the source does not appear to use those actual words. Hopefully, someone who reads German fuently enough to give an accurate translation will give us the actual words used. Meowy 01:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Here are the passages from the interview referencing Irving:

Seit Jahrzehnten pflegen Sie eine gute Freundschaft mit [dem] britischen Historiker David Irving, der als Holocaustleugner angegriffen wird.

Hochhuth: Irving ist ein fabelhafter Pionier der Zeitgeschichte, der großartige Bücher geschrieben hat. Ganz zweifellos ein Historiker von der Größe eines Joachim Fest. Der Vorwurf, er sei ein Holocaustleugner, ist einfach idiotisch! Ich bedauere sehr, daß es die Stadt Dresden nicht für nötig befunden hat, ihn als Ehrengast zu den Feierlichkeiten am Sonntag einzuladen, nachdem er sich - mit nur 23 Jahren! - mit dem grundlegenden Buch "Der Untergang Dresdens" als erster diesem Kapitel gewidmet und so viel für dessen Aufarbeitung getan hat.

Immerhin bezweifelt Irving die Schuld Hitlers am Holocaust.

Hochhuth: Ich will zugeben, Irving ist wohl passiert, was so vielen großen Biographen schon passiert ist: Er hat sich von seinem Forschungsgegenstand überwältigen lassen. Er war eine Zeit lang tatsächlich des Wahns, zu glauben, Hitler habe erst ein halbes Jahr nach Beginn der Vergasungen in Auschwitz davon gehört, weil sie auf Initiative "seines Himmlers" begonnen worden seien. Das ist natürlich dummes Zeug, aber was dann daraus gemacht wurde, ist wirklich der Gipfel der Verleumdung.

Aber Herr Hochhuth, immerhin behauptet Irving, in Auschwitz hätte es keine Gaskammern gegeben. Er hat flapsig formuliert, in Gaskammern seien dort "weniger Menschen umgekommen als 1969 auf dem Rücksitz Edward Kennedys" - und da saß bekanntlich nur dessen Freundin.

Hochhuth: Da hat er seiner nicht ganz unbritischen Neigung zum schwarzen Humor auf zynische Weise freien Lauf gelassen. Wahrscheinlich ist er wahnsinnig provoziert worden, ehe er das gesagt hat. Als Historiker ist er ein absolut seriöser Mann.

Seit 1993 hat Irving wegen seiner fragwürdigen Thesen in der Bundesrepublik - wie in anderen Staaten auch - Einreiseverbot.

Hochhuth: Das ist grotesk, immer wieder war er bei uns zu Hause zu Besuch, wir telefonieren miteinander, ich kenne ihn wirklich gut.

Was halten Sie dann für die Erklärung des Falles Irving?

Hochhuth: Ich kenne keinen "Fall Irving" - sondern nur einiges, was zu seiner Verleumdung gesagt worden ist. Es ist doch so: Irving ist Halbjude, seine Mutter war Jüdin! Ihn als Holocaustleugner zu verleumden, ist ein Racheakt, weil er in seinen Büchern so schaurige Wahrheiten über uns Deutsche sagt. Wer Irving verbietet, deutsche Archive zu besuchen, will - das tun Politiker gern - vor der Wahrheit über deutsche Untaten im Hitlerkrieg verschont bleiben.

Apparently the article paraphrases Irving ist ein fabelhafter Pionier der Zeitgeschichte, der großartige Bücher geschrieben hat. Ganz zweifellos ein Historiker von der Größe eines Joachim Fest. A more precise translation of these two sentences would be, "Irving is a fabulous pioneer of modern history who has written magnificent books. Without a doubt, a historian to equal someone like Joachim Fest." Note that Hochhuth has often played fast and loose with historical facts, that his famous play The Deputy relied on "information" provided by the KGB, and that I can find no confirmation in the David Irving article for Hochhuth's claim of Irving's mother having been Jewish (as if it would matter).--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I have raised a question at Talk:Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg that user:Meowy and others might be interested in.

Thanks, I've changed the quote to the wording you used in your translation. Meowy 23:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Who Played Churchill in the London premiere of "Soldiers"?

The article refers to Soldiers opening in London with John Colicos in the cast. It doesn't explicitly say that he played Churchill, though that would have been logical casting. I have a strong recollection of having seen Richard Burton playing Churchill in this production. Is it likely that Burton would have replaced Colicos in the role? Usually one opens with the biggest star available, which would have been Burton not Colicos, but I suppose it is possible that Burton took the role over when his film commitments permitted.... Anyone able to clarify the facts here? Nandt1 (talk) 12:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

It does seem to have been John Colicos. Burton made no stage appearances from 1966 to 1976. You may be thinking of Burton's role as Churchill in the 1974 TV film The Gathering Storm (UK title Walk With Destiny). Khamba Tendal (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

notice

New portrait on Wikimedia Commons ([1]). Greeting, --BlackIceNRW (talk) 14:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

In one part it says "Although the play has never received serious praise as either literature or history,[citation needed]". How can you find a cite for something that never happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.48.62 (talk) 23:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

This statement is an interpretation of the reception history of a play with a major impact and thus needs a citation. If nobody comes up with one, we should delete it. --Diggindeeper (talk) 14:10, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rolf Hochhuth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205011340/http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTUzYmJhMGQ5Y2UxOWUzNDUyNWUwODJiOTEzYjY4NzI%3D to http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTUzYmJhMGQ5Y2UxOWUzNDUyNWUwODJiOTEzYjY4NzI=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

2. Picture

A donkey could made this photo bether. The person about the article is just seen from the back. Thats nothing. Just a insult even for a donkey! --178.197.224.112 (talk) 22:45, 4 January 2019 (UTC)